Tag: communism

Saul David Alinsky (January 30, 1909 – June 12, 1972) was an American community organizer, and writer. He is generally considered to be the founder of modern community organizing. He is often noted for his book Rules for Radicals.

What communities did he influence and how are they fairing today?

Chicago: Highest crime rates and murder rates in the U.S. This was his primary forey.

Detroit: Very high crime rates, massive shutdowns and exodus by businesses no longer able to afford union pay that was 4x higher than people deserved.

Southern California barrios: We all know how those turned out.

Oakland, California: Ditto.

He also arranged “fart-ins” and “piss-ins.” Not exactly a classy individual. In fact, much of the gutter tactics we’ve seen during the LA riots, the Ferguson riots, and the Baltimore riots can be traced directly back to Alinsky’s influence.

Beware in bashing him outright, though, for he wrote the following in his book, Rules for Radicals: “The job of the organizer is to

People in the Soviet Union (communism) waiting in line at the footwear store.

maneuver and bait the establishment so that it will publicly attack him as a ‘dangerous enemy.'” According to Alinsky, “the hysterical instant reaction of the establishment [will] not only validate [the organizer’s] credentials of competency but also ensure automatic popular invitation.”

Although Alinsky shunned political parties, the Democrat Party has wholly embraced his lying, cheating, stealing, and wholly disruptive tactics.

What does that tell you about how low the Democrat Party is willing to go? We’ve certainly seen it in their behavior.

Hillary Clinton wrote her senior thesis on Alinsky’s work in 1969 while a political science major at Wellesley College.

What does that tell you about how low Hillary Clinton is willing to go? We’ve certainly seen it in her behavior.

For example, Democrats love to brag about how many copies of Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals, they’ve given to Tea Party leaders. What they don’t mention is how many of those copies have been tossed on account of its heinous methods.

Given the extremes to which the Democrat Party has gone to depart from the U.S. Constitution, and the significant degree to which the Republican Party has followed, here’s a radical idea for modern times: Stick with the U.S. Constitution.

Behold the wonders of Socialism. Thirty years ago, we were seeing precisely the same thing, and for precisely the same reason, over in Russia.

When are countries and the blitheringly idiotic liberals they keep suckering into this mess going to wake up and realize the truth: Socialism DOES NOT WORK.

It’s a fundamental fact of human nature, often referred to as the 80/20 rule, that four-fifths of humans on the planet will never rise above mediocrity. They won’t go the extra mile. Whether they make good money or bad, they’re content to collect their paycheck or food stamps, provided they have food, clothing, shelter, and a means of occupying their time.

Socialism requires the reverse, that at least four-fifths of the humans on the planet are always going the extra mile.

One-fifth to four-fifths is a massive, jump, a 400% improvement over the abilities of the world’s current population. At best, it’s a dystopian reality masquerading as a utopian future. It’s a pipe dream. For every “success” story put forth by the idealistic liberal zealots, nine more stories of failure are vying for attention on the world’s stage.

At worst, however, is precisely what we see happening in Venezuela: An entire population suckered into the mindless garbage that socialism can actually work. They’re reaping oats of the stupidity they sewed by electing whoever’s running that funny farm.

“”It’s an extreme situation,” says Xinia Camacho, owner of a 20-room boutique hotel in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada national park. “For over a year we haven’t had toilet paper, soap, any kind of milk, coffee or sugar.”

This isn’t dystopia. It’s real, and the reality of socialism, communism, and all other forms of collectivism is that it SUCKS.

I was originally opposed to Ted Cruz on this point, as it appeared he was railing against Net Neutrality.

NOT TRUE.

He’s railing against Obama’s very warped version of it. Put simply, Obama’s version of Net Neutrality isn’t Net Neutrality AT ALL.

Here’s what Net Neutrality has looked for the last 30 years, since the mid-1980s, back when the Internet was known as Darpanet:

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) charged one price for each bandwidth tier. For example, $30 for 3 Mbps; $65 for 25 Mbps, etc.

The put reasonable caps on total bandwidth per month, which was ok, such caps prevent abuses and keep the prices lower for the rest of us.

Prices are set by the market, and free market competition keeps prices reasonable. When prices become outrageous, it opens the doors to more competition, which usually appears as either more bandwidth for the same price, or the same bandwidth at lower prices, while maintaining the same quality at lower prices.

Obama’s version of Net Neutrality, however, is to “reclassify consumer broadband service under Title II of the Telecommunications Act,” and he would have to power to back up his restrictions with the long arm of the Department of Justice.

Title II outlines the granting and licensing of broadcast spectrum by the government, including a provision to issue licenses to current television stations to commence digital television broadcasting, the use of the revenues generated by such licensing, the terms of broadcast licenses, the process of renewing broadcast licenses, direct broadcast satellite services, automated ship distress and safety systems, and restrictions on over-the-air reception devices.

Obama wants strict controls and regulations on content providers, but he’s not limiting his aspirations to traditional Internet sources. He wants to control mobile devices, too, and he wants to control all aspects of what you can see and hear on your mobile device, as well as what you can send.

Under Obama’s plan, each and every individual in the United States of America, if not the world, would be regulated as a “broadcaster.” The business ramifications of this would be extreme:

As noted by J.D. Tuccille (2014), “In a 2001 examination of decades of antitrust policy for the Cato Journal, George Bittlingmayer, now at the University of Kansas, wrote that “It turns out that whatever the ability of antitrust to lower prices and increase output in theory or in isolated circumstances, one actual effect of antitrust in practice may have been to curtail investment.” In particular, he attributed low investment in the late 1950s and early 1960s to “aggressive antitrust and related initiatives””

Much of the incredible innovation that has occurred over the last twenty years would grind to a halt. Many of the current services you enjoy may very well become illegal if Obama gets his way, and because they would fall under the strong arm of the FCC, if ISPs refused to comply with the new rules, they would simply be shut down.

As Cruz spokeswoman Catherine Frazier noted, “This changes a relentlessly innovative and growing part of our economy into one that must wait for permission for any new ideas.” Most companies cannot afford to sit idly by, waiting on approval from the federal government. That’s largely what killed the U.S.S.R. Companies would bail left and right for greener pastures. Put simply, the Internet would start looking like a redneck road sign at the end of a lean hunting season.

The deleterious impact on innovation, however, isn’t the half of it. Since every producer of content, including those who blog or video blog would now be regulated by the FCC, they would be as subject to abuse by the FCC as conservative groups have been abused by the IRS in recent years. Although Obama specifically stated some limits in his proposal, five years of history have clearly and rather incessantly reminded us of the miniscule value of Obama’s promises.

Before implementing yet another Obama”care” fiasco, take a look around you. Sure, ISP prices are higher than we want. Their revenue models have reached the end of their useful lives, and they’re beginning to make some changes. However, alternative sources of programming blitzed pass them like a kid chasing down an ice cream truck on a hot August afternoon. Both Google and AT&T are laying the infrastructure for the future in the form of fiber. We are not in trouble here, folks. For around $25 a month, I enjoy programming from the top three on-demand sources: Netflix, Hulu, and Amazon. That’s far more content that would ever have time to watch. My Ooma IP phone allows me to make unlimited local and long-distance calls for $3.85 a month. E-mail services are robust and free, as are some blogs and website hosting services.

It doesn’t GET any better than this, folks. We are enjoying the benefits of unbridled innovation in the form of reasonable prices and a massive selection of content and services.

He was born January 17, 1937, but you’re probably saying, “Who is Ed Mezvinsky?” and “Why should I care?”

Bear with me for a minute, as the answer has to do with Hillary Clinton’s run for the 2016 elections, and a great deal more. The “more” part will boggle your mind.

Ed Mezvinsky is a former Democrat congressman who represented Iowa’s 1st congressional district in the United States House of Representatives for two terms, from 1973 to 1977. He sat on the House Judiciary Committee that decided the fate of Richard Nixon.

He was outspoken saying that Nixon was a crook and a disgrace to politics and the nation and should be impeached.

He and the Clintons were friends and very politically intertwined for many years.

Ed Mezvinsky had an affair with NBC News reporter Marjorie Sue Margolies and later married her after his wife divorced him.

In 1993, Marjorie Margolies-Mezvinsky, then a freshman Democrat in Congress, cast the deciding vote that got President Bill Clinton’s controversial tax package through the House of Representatives.

In March 2001, Ed Mezvinsky was indicted and later pleaded guilty to 31 of 69 counts of bank fraud, mail fraud, and wire fraud. He had embezzled more than $10 million dollars from people via both a Ponzi scheme and the notorious Nigerian e-mail scams (yes, he’s “that guy”). He was found guilty and sentenced to 80 months in federal prison.

After serving less than three-quarters of that time, he was released in April 2008. He remains on federal probation. To this day, he still owes $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.

About now you are saying, “So what!”

Well, this is Marc and Chelsea Mezvinsky. Ed Mezvinsky is Chelsea Clinton’s father-in law. Chelsea married his son.

Marc and Chelsea are in their early thirties and purchased a 10.5 million dollar NYC apartment (after being married in George Soros’ mansion).

Has anyone heard any mention of any of this in any of the media? No?

Gee… I wonder why…

If this guy was Jenna or Barbara Bush’s, or better yet, Sarah Palin’s daughter’s father-in-law, the news would be an everyday headline and every detail would be reported over and over. The liberal rags, however, are owned by the same corrupted cabal to which the Clintons, the Mezvinskys, and Soros belongs.

People are already talking about Hillary as our next President, and there is a distinct possibly Chelsea will run in the future. The headlines are already proclaiming, “How Hillary Clinton won the 2014 midterms.”

Apparently, the cycle of the rich and corrupt never ends.

The Democrat’s ongoing scheme is simple: Promise anything to the masses in order to keep being reelected, then abuse the power of their office to line their own pockets, the pockets of their friends, and the pockets of people and companies who funded their campaigns — at your expense.

Lying and corruption seem to make Democrat candidates more popular, yet Democrats who are repeatedly suckered into voting for them keep wondering when they’re going to get their slice of the pie.

The answer is, “Never, so long as you keep allowing yourself to be suckered in to voting for Democrats.” If the Democrats have you on a hook, and want to keep you on that hook, the only only solution is to get off the hook. Stop voting Democrat.

“When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty.” – Thomas Jefferson

“America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves.” – Abraham Lincoln

“…a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” – Martin Luther King

The 2014 elections are by far the most important elections to date of this century. Despite governmental reassurances to the contrary, America is tottering over the brink of economic collapse. Vote wrong, and we most certainly will lose. Vote right, and we might be able to haul her back from the edge.

As a registered Independent, I spent all afternoon Sunday reviewing not only the positions, but also the voting records of all 21 positions (42 candidates — half Republican, half Democrat) on my ballot. Given my “preaching” here on Facebook, I wanted to be absolutely certain I was electing the best candidate for each position, and not just “voting party line.”

I based my decisions mostly on their voting records. The criteria was simple: Had they supported and defended the Constitution,“the supreme Law of the Land,” as per their oaths of office? Or were they perverting our government by actions which undermined our Constitution and the rights and freedoms it recognizes and protects?

It was close in only 5 of the 21 open positions. The other 16 positions were slam-dunks.

In ALL cases, however, the records of the Republican candidates made it clear they stood for our rights and freedoms, while the records of the Democrat candidates made it clear they stood for bigger government at the EXPENSE of our rights and freedoms.

Sunday’s exercise was yet another of countless confirmations that the Democrat Party itself is no longer American, that it has been usurped by a mix of communists, fascists, socialists, muslims, opportunists and just plain idiots, to be used solely for the purpose of pulling the wool over the eyes of mostly lower to middle-class voters in order to remain in power, raise taxes, and siphon off a great deal of our hard-earned tax dollars into their own pockets and those of their friends.

To be fair, some Republicans are doing this, too, but I continually find they’re doing so to a far lesser extent.

Bottom line: I remain an Independent voter, yet cast all my votes towards the Republicans. My decisions were not based on the color of their party, but on the content of their character.

I’ll leave you with one last observation. Five years of digging into what goes on behind the curtains in both parties have lead me to conclude what the Democrats say about the Republicans are largely lies, often made up on the spot, and that the elements in the following graphic are largely true:

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican, not a Democrat, and for many very good reasons which are even more sound today than they were back then.

As reported by Fox News on October 15, 2014, the United Nations has issued an ultimatum to the United States of America: Control Ebola or face an unprecedented situation.

What the UN means by “unprecedented situation” can be found on the UN website (http://un-influenza.org/?q=content/un-response), in their response plan for the Avian Flu, under Objective 6: Continuity Under Pandemic Conditions: “Ensuring the continuity of essential social, economic and governance services, and effective implementation of humanitarian relief, under pandemic conditions.”

Reading between the lines, as well as observing their response throughout other nations, this includes the mandatory implementation of the UN’s other agendas, most notably confiscating all firearms for the “safety of all response workers.”

Similar indications can also be found on the World Health Organization’s website, in their Global Alert and Response (GAR) page (http://www.who.int/csr/en/): “Coordinate and support Member States for pandemic and seasonal influenza preparedness and response.”

Again, reading between the lines, the WHO brings the doctors, while it’s parent organization, the UN, brings the muscle.

This is further echoed in their August 28, 2014 Ebola Response Roadmap (http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/131596/1/EbolaResponseRoadmap.pdf?ua=1).

This document clearly states it’s purpose on page 5: “To assist governments and partners in the revision and resourcing of country-specific operational plans for Ebola response, and the coordination of international support for their full implementation.”

While they tie their “country-specific operational plans” to the “Ebola response,” the fact remains that an OPLAN is an OPLAN. It’s an Operational Plan. That’s military lingo for how an organization intendeds to accomplish its mission, and their specific intent for the United States of America comes through rather glaringly in Objective 2 on the same page:

2. To ensure emergency and immediate application of comprehensive Ebola response intervention in countries with an initial case(s) or with localized transmission.

The key activity of Objective 2: “Coordinate operations and information across all partners, and the information, security, finance and other relevant sectors.

The most alarming aspect of this document, however, involves their definition of “security:”

Security: where necessary, and particularly in areas of intense transmission and short term extraordinary containment measures, national/local authorities must plan for and deploy the security services necessary to ensure the physical security of Ebola facilities. National/local authorities must give particular attention to ensuring the security of the staff working in Ebola treatment centres, Ebola referral/isolation centres, laboratories and, if required, for teams working at the community level to conduct surveillance, contact tracing and safe burials.”

I have no problem with ensuring the security of Ebola treatment facilities. The question is, under Obama’s management, will it ever stop there? What legislation is in place to prevent overbearing law enforcement from pulling the same crap as the New Orleans Police Department pulled on American citizens immediately following Hurricane Katrina?

Since Day 1 at their training academies, American law enforcement officers have been taught to “control, control, control.” When you put them into a widespread situation, many of them are overwhelmed. They fall back on their training without any regard for the Constitutional implications that what they’re doing is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. It might be suitable for a localized riot. It is NOT suitable for widespread chaos. This was most dramatically exhibited when SWAT teams busted down door after door after door in Boston immediately after the marathon bombing.

Did they respect our Constitutional rights? No. THEY BLEW RIGHT PAST THEM.

Again: What U.S. Federal Legislation is in place to ensure that NEVER happens again? What penalties are in place for local, county, state, and federal law enforcement officers, as well as augmenting forces like the National Guard, to prevent them from crossing the line?

Comments within the document such as “repurpose existing programmes [sic] to support control efforts” with respect to “security” indicate they have ZERO intention of respecting our Constitution.

Here’s a thought: Instead of assuming Americans are idiots, let’s try another route: Education. Let Americans do what we do best: Control ourselves.

In 2012, immediately following the Mountain Shadows flare-up of the Waldo Canyon fire, I and all other residents of my apartment complex were denied access to our domiciles for five full days, despite the fact that residents in homes on either side of us were allowed to return after just TWO days. We were told it was for our “safety,” despite the fact we were no less safe than those homeowners.

THAT CRAP HAS GOT TO STOP.

Again, Congressman Lamborn: What legislation, specifically, do you have in place to ensure these rampant denials of our Constitutional rights NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN?

With few exceptions, We the People are perfectly capable of controlling ourselves. We’re well aware of the risks to both ourselves and others, regardless of what Obama is saying to the contrary.

All we need are clear and unambiguous guidelines. We don’t Obama lying to us in pathetic and misinformative attempts to calm our nerves. Older generations grew up during the Cold War. Younger generations watch The Walking Dead every week. Let’s get real!

As a retired USAF Officer, I remain well-trained in CBRNE operations. Most of my neighbors do not have my training, but given the fact this is a military town, there are a LOT of us scattered throughout the community who do.

Even those who are untrained, however, know the risks. If they’re told to limit travel for food and work, use hand sanitizer or wear and discard gloves, keep their shoes in the garage, and wipe down all doorknobs and other touched surfaces with a soap/water/bleach solution, I’m pretty darn sure they can handle that!

I can’t help but wonder if this is the beginning of the end of the United States of America.

By refusing to close our borders and by bringing in infected individuals, Obama is INVITING a UN takeover of our country. He’s long been looking for a way to either ditch or circumvent our Constitution, and I believe he may very well have found it.

UNLESS, of course, laws exist which clearly limit the scope of his many executive orders, most of which were drafted during his first term, yet clearly targeted to give him absolute dictatorial authority over our nation in times of crises — whether those crises were unavoidable, or, as many of us believe, manufactured by Obama himself.

On October 15, Dr. Ben Carson said, “We’ve known for a long time that [Ebola] has this kind of potential. That’s the reason that several weeks ago I said it was a real mistake to bring infected people in to this country in any way.”

The two organizations are the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).

Neither one of these organizations are in compliance with our Constitution.

“The National Governors Association (NGA) is the bipartisan organization of the nation’s governors. Through NGA, governors share best practices, speak with a collective voice on national policy and develop innovative solutions that improve state government AND SUPPORT THE PRINCIPLES OF FEDERALISM.”

The U.S. Constitution, on the other hand, is diametrically opposed to federalism. Instead, it granted specific powers to the federal government, severely limiting those powers to only those areas which might be better served at the federal level than the state level. As reemphasized in Tenth Amendment, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

As for the CCSSO, they developed Common Core. Yes, I’ve read through “The Common Core State Standards: Insight into Their Development and Purpose,” written by David T. Conley, co-Chair of the Validation Committee. I’ve seen many of the “outstanding” examples of Common Core’s blithering idiocy, if not massively liberal/left/socialist bent (broken, actually) and can’t help but wonder if this rampant communism is unique to the CCSSO or if it’s endemic throughout the entire U.S. educational system? Regardless, much of the crap found in Common Core stands firmly AGAINST the principles in our Constitution.

What the CCSSO fails to realize is that our Constitution isn’t an advisory. It is the LAW, “the supreme Law of the Land” (Article VI). When Common Core teachers that which opposes our Constitution, CCSSO becomes guilty of teaching our students to violate the law. CCSSO is fostering criminal activity.

It is for precisely these reasons why so many states have already rejected Common Core, and why so many more states are in the process of formalizing their rejection.

I was educated in the school systems of three states: Florida, Louisiana, and Virginia. My school system in Northern Virginia was by far the best, and fully prepared me for college and life. They were so good, in fact, I was able to retire at age 45, yet have chosen to go back to school, and will soon be graduating with honors.

Virginia has already formally rejected Common Core, and both Florida and Louisiana are in the process of formally rejecting it. I live in Colorado, which is also in the processes of formally rejecting it, despite the fact our Governor, John Hickenlooper, is the current Chair of the National Governors Association, and a drooling advocate of this educational cesspool.